DECOCTION which brews??

I did search, there is plenty of "HOW TO" but which beers really benefit from a decoction?

I Have lagered, and can, but I am almost strictly an ALE guy. Do you do one eevry brew? Just on some?

NEVER?

I have used it all over the board. I find it particularly helpful in my Oktoberfest and in light lagers. I have used it to good effect on Am. IPA's, Am. wheats, and amber lagers. Oddly enough, I have never done a deco German wheat...

It definitely has an effect, but it can be compensated for pretty well by balancing malts and using some melo malt. However, IME it cannot be duplicated completely. There is a richness to beers done with a good deco pull that I haven't been able to replicate otherwise.

If I have the time and the inspiration to do it with a certain beer, I will do it.

A decoction mash works nicely for a Dopplebock and Weissbier (Hefeweizen). Cheers!!!

Just about any German styled lager benifits from a decoction.

I was wondering this myself today. I was brewing a Belgian pale ale a while ago, and I forgot to heat up sparge water during the mash. I always do a mash-out, so instead of using a batch sparge to hit 168, I just ran a quick decoction. Is there any reason not to do this with most of my beers?

The only beer I can think of that really wouldn't benefit from a decoction is maybe a dry stout. I've only done two decoctions so far because I was always intimidated by them, but they're really easy. The calculator makes it a piece of cake.

I use at least a single decoction for all beers. I use a double decoction for anything that has a complex grain bill (I.E more than 3 or 4 varieties of grain.) . IME the more complex the bill the greater benefit there is from a decoction. Plus it just plain fun to do IMHO.

cheezydemon3 said:

I did search, there is plenty of "HOW TO" but which beers really benefit from a decoction?

I Have lagered, and can, but I am almost strictly an ALE guy. Do you do one eevry brew? Just on some?

NEVER?

Click to expand...

If you want to do an Ale I would do a hefewiezen or roggenbier otherwise a dopplebock would be traditional. IMO...With munich and melonoidin malts decoctions are a waste of time. With that said I understand some people like to do them for fun

I plan to actually simulate a decoction on a pm by boiling some of the grains and just adding them back in at sparge.

Will report.

I just did my first single-decoction and plan on using it from now on whenever I make a lager. I might even try it in certain ales down the road. If you have a second pot you can use, even a smaller one, I found it much easier to do than I thought it would be.

I haven't done a double decoction yet, but will definitely do that when I brew my bock.

I use single pseudo decoctions all the time for mash temp raises. I say pseudo because I only run wort off and boil it to bring temp up, then add it back. Next time I do a belgian wit I will do a full decoction or two to give it that silky mouth feel that mine seems to lack. I've been working on my wit recipe for two years now and I'm getting close but I think the trick is a two sacch step decoction. One at 147ish and one at 156ish with no mash out step.

I think a lot would benefit from decoctions and I plan on doing them more often.

I figure to do it on every brew now. Why not?

cheezydemon3 said:

I figure to do it on every brew now. Why not?

Click to expand...

On some brews its plan not necessary, IMO. Like an IPA, but again IMO, all European Beers (excluding British Beers) should be decocted.

Decocting makes an amazing difference in a hefe. I like it in Berliner Weiss and Octoberfest as well. I've tried it in a saison and was similarly pleased.

AWESOME! Thanks Dwarven.

bh10 said:

On some brews its plan not necessary, IMO. Like an IPA, but again IMO, all European Beers (excluding British Beers) should be decocted.

Click to expand...

It is never necessary. However, it always affects the end product. It adds a character that is debatable, but in my opinion noticeable and unreproducible by other means.

I have not done decoctions as of yet.

Many people seem to be saying it makes a difference. But what is the difference? Is it based only on melonoidin reactions/products? I would think you could compensate for this with different malts as mentioned above. (I think Strong also mentions this in his new book)

Have many people done any side-by-sides with regard to decoction versus adjuncts?

It does make a difference. You can compensate with malts. A difference, however slight, still exists between the malt examples and the deco examples. I have done side by sides.

Boerderij_Kabouter said:

It does make a difference. You can compensate with malts. A difference, however slight, still exists between the malt examples and the deco examples. I have done side by sides.

Click to expand...

So what is the difference exactly? Taste? Mouthfeel? What part can be compenstated for and which not?

I've been very happy with my beers without decoction. But I'm always looking to make even better batches so I'm looking for more discrete descriptions of what changes/improves with decoction to determine if its something I want to do.

I do decoctions for all German wheat styles and typically all Belgian styles. I do not do them for any British or American styles.

The quality I have percieved, is a depth of flavor that is hard to describe.

cheezydemon3 said:

The quality I have percieved, is a depth of flavor that is hard to describe.

Click to expand...

Yeah. I tend to associate decocted beers with a fuller mouthfeel even with a low FG, and enhanced maltiness. I did a side-by-side comparing two hefes, identical except for the mash. The decocted one was a much better beer (and scored higher in comps, as well).

Sounds like I may be reading up on decoction techniques...